1. The petitioners are the original accused who were tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Anand for the offence under S. 63 (a), or in the alternative, under S. 63 (b) of the Copyright Act, 1957 ('the Act') read with S. 34 of the I.P.C. and under S.120 - B of the I.P.C. and were convicted by the learned Magistrate for the offence under S. 63 (a) of the Act read with S. 34 of the I.P.C. and each one was sentenced to suffer S. I. for three months and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, one month's S. I.

2 - 3.  xxxx xxxx xxxx

4. Mr. D. K. Shah, the learned Advocate appearing for the accused, has not been able to show as to why the order of conviction and sentence so far as it relates to accused No. 1 should be interfered with in revision by this Court. There is cogent and reliable evidence against accused No. 1 establishing beyond reasonable doubt that he had committed the offence under S. 63 (a) of the Act which provides, so far as it is material for our purpose, that -
"Any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of -
(a) the copyright in a work, or
(b) xxxx xxxx xxxx
shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year, or with fi